County Championship Finals

Discussion about all aspects of the ECF County Championships.
Neil Graham
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Neil Graham » Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:35 pm

So people don't have to spend time wading through Oxford Fusion here are the results in brief:-

Open Lancashire 8* Yorkshire 8
Minor Suffolk 7½ Lincolnshire
U180 Devon 8* Middlesex 8
U160 Lancashire 6½ Yorkshire
U140 Nottinghamshire 7 Lancashire 9
U120 Middlesex 5½ Essex
U100 Leicestershire 8½ Warwickshire 3½

* Win on Board Count

MartinCarpenter
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by MartinCarpenter » Sun Jul 02, 2017 7:43 pm

David Robertson wrote:Roger Williamson is Merseyside, by the way. He must be only the second player from Liverpool to play for Lancashire in 40 years; the other being the late John Littlewood. Why so? Apart from the fact that Merseyside has been a separate 'county' (albeit inactive at county chess for a couple of decades), the truth of the matter is the inward-facing Lancashire officials have maintained a closed-shop, never selecting from beyond a familiar pool of pure-bred Lancastrians from grim small towns. Or so it has seemed. All the same, congratulations to Lancashire, helped to the title by some gritty performances from my 4NCL team-mates
That's probably the more remarkable thing than the rule change with the Hortons - they've previously played for GM and for Lancs to even consider selecting someone who has done that..... Wow :) Maybe the Manticores team is working miracles of open mindedness.

Worth emphasising that it really was a good performance on the day too - I think Yorkshire were still favorites on paper and that squad is very battle hardened and used to winning in recent years.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1216
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Alan Walton » Mon Jul 03, 2017 9:11 am

If the Dual Eligibility rules still is in place (despite some beliefs that this expired many years ago, there must be some document hanging around stating this) then the ECF should look at removing it ASAP, I give the following reasons why

1) Greater Manchester exists as a county under British law (since 1974 certain areas don't belong in Lancashire/Cheshire/Yorkshire/Derbyshire)
2) The ECF recognize Greater Manchester as a county
3) The ECF has set rules about eligibility
4) By keeping the dual eligibility rule means the ECF actively seeks to penalise an officially recognized county (possibly also Merseyside and Cleveland)

When the cut off occurs is another matter, some would say it should be from the original split 1974, others would say it was when the court case was settled out of court which I believe is Harry Lamb's 1987 date

Under the GM proposal to enter the NCCU was giving Dual Eligibility to all Manchester players the option to play for the historical counties; Lancashire decline this saying we could enter as Lancashire 2 (god knows what the Cheshire players would do); so if Lancashire original decline dual eligibility it suddenly becomes convenient for them to actually use it in this occasion

The match is was played in good spirits and some board were very competitive and could have gone either way; congrats to the winners

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17319
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Jul 03, 2017 9:32 am

Alan Walton wrote: The ECF has set rules about eligibility
The most recent rules appear to be these

http://www.englishchess.org.uk/competit ... hips-2016/

in which it says
C3. Players Eligible to Participate

C3.1. A player is eligible to represent a County in the Championship if the player meets one of the following criteria:

(i) Birth in that county.

(ii) Five years’ residence in that county at any time.

(iii) Two months immediate previous and present membership of a club either in or affiliated to that County.

(iv) One month’s immediately previous and present residence in that County.

(v) Present attendance as a student at a school, college or university in that County.
Earlier in the document a "County" is defined by

Reference in these rules to counties shall be construed as applying to counties admitted to membership in accordance with Article 5.2 of the ECF Articles.

That only says
“County Associations” being such chess organisations representative of chess within statutory or otherwise customarily accepted county areas as shall be admitted by the Council to membership under this Article 5(2).

Alan Walton
Posts: 1216
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Alan Walton » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:05 am

Roger,

From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17319
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:19 am

Alan Walton wrote: From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition
Personally I think most or all eligibility rules should be scrapped and you should be able to play for who you want to. That might be the only way to resolve the forty year old dispute which appears to have started with Lancashire objecting to a new county taking "their" players away.

But now it's been asked, perhaps the ECF could clarify the eligibility conditions for playing for Lancashire and presumably therefore why the Horton brothers satisfied them. The explicit rules about eligibility are muddy on what constitutes a county.

Down in the south, the Thames has been used as a demarcation line. So if it mattered in the slightest, Oxford, Bucks, Middlesex and Essex would be north whilst Berks, Surrey and Kent would be south. The counties which contain parts of London are defined these days using London boroughs, with some compromise over Richmond and Twickenham.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1216
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Alan Walton » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:34 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alan Walton wrote: From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition
Personally I think most or all eligibility rules should be scrapped and you should be able to play for who you want to. That might be the only way to resolve the forty year old dispute which appears to have started with Lancashire objecting to a new county taking "their" players away.

But now it's been asked, perhaps the ECF could clarify the eligibility conditions for playing for Lancashire and presumably therefore why the Horton brothers satisfied them. The explicit rules about eligibility are muddy on what constitutes a county.

Down in the south, the Thames has been used as a demarcation line. So if it mattered in the slightest, Oxford, Bucks, Middlesex and Essex would be north whilst Berks, Surrey and Kent would be south. The counties which contain parts of London are defined these days using London boroughs, with some compromise over Richmond and Twickenham.
I agree, also it doesn't just mean the Horton's; as David Roberston previously posted Roger Williamson also played who only plays in the Merseyside league, so clarification on that matter would also be required

John Reyes
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by John Reyes » Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:59 pm

Alan Walton wrote:
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alan Walton wrote: From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition
Personally I think most or all eligibility rules should be scrapped and you should be able to play for who you want to. That might be the only way to resolve the forty year old dispute which appears to have started with Lancashire objecting to a new county taking "their" players away.

But now it's been asked, perhaps the ECF could clarify the eligibility conditions for playing for Lancashire and presumably therefore why the Horton brothers satisfied them. The explicit rules about eligibility are muddy on what constitutes a county.

Down in the south, the Thames has been used as a demarcation line. So if it mattered in the slightest, Oxford, Bucks, Middlesex and Essex would be north whilst Berks, Surrey and Kent would be south. The counties which contain parts of London are defined these days using London boroughs, with some compromise over Richmond and Twickenham.
I agree, also it doesn't just mean the Horton's; as David Roberston previously posted Roger Williamson also played who only plays in the Merseyside league, so clarification on that matter would also be required

I have raised this in the Lancashire AGM and also at the NCCU meeting, but it is Bill O'Rourke who is blocking the Greater Manchester vote to join the NCCU and he will always like to put his spin on things.

I 100% agreed with Alan Walton and I hope people stop this silly feud!!!
Any postings on here represent my personal views only

Neil Graham
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Neil Graham » Mon Jul 03, 2017 10:40 pm

Can I tackle any number of the points raised in this last tranche of posts?
Dragoljub Sudar wrote:Congratulations to Nottinghamshire for winning the Minor Counties!

Ok, maybe not, but Notts deserve half the credit as 9 of Lincolnshire's team (including 6 of their top 9 boards) played in the Notts league this season, with Grantham 1 winning our 1st division for the 8th year in a row (this season they won all 14 matches!).
It's no coincidence that the captain of Grantham, Nigel Birtwistle, is also Lincolnshire's team captain. Fine organisation and excellent captaincy on all counts. Should any Lincolnshire players wish to abscond to Notts please let me know!
Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alan Walton wrote: From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition
Personally I think most or all eligibility rules should be scrapped and you should be able to play for who you want to. That might be the only way to resolve the forty year old dispute which appears to have started with Lancashire objecting to a new county taking "their" players away.

But now it's been asked, perhaps the ECF could clarify the eligibility conditions for playing for Lancashire and presumably therefore why the Horton brothers satisfied them. The explicit rules about eligibility are muddy on what constitutes a county.

Down in the south, the Thames has been used as a demarcation line. So if it mattered in the slightest, Oxford, Bucks, Middlesex and Essex would be north whilst Berks, Surrey and Kent would be south. The counties which contain parts of London are defined these days using London boroughs, with some compromise over Richmond and Twickenham.
The County Championships have been running since 1908. There is a competition where there are no eligibility rules - I think it's called the 4NCL. I note Mr de Coverly comes from a county that doesn't take part in any ECF competitions. The present rules are perfectly adequate.

Another post follows!

Neil Graham
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Neil Graham » Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:12 pm

Moving on to eligibility matters.

I organise county teams. I ensure that all players in my teams are eligible to represent Nottinghamshire. When our sides sit down to play other counties, I cannot spend time scrutinising their every player and assume my counterpart has followed the rules just as I have done. If people are unhappy I suggest that a part of the match captain's duties is to sign the match sheet prior to the match confirming that his team members are eligible to play under Schedule C of the rules. In the case of the players mentioned in previous posts I have no idea if they were eligible to play - that's a matter for the ECF.

It is to be noted that Greater Manchester were county champions in 1990, 2004 & 2005. Nowadays they can't even raise a team - the only team they ran this year was in the U160 section. I have no idea why they would want to join the NCCU - the NCCU don't have any county chess apart from the odd match between Yorkshire & Lancashire if they bother to turn out. As Manchester have no county teams either it seems a pretty fruitless effort - at least there is some county chess in the MCCU! They are always welcome here unlike elsewhere.

The reason for all this is the usual one - there are sufficient players but no volunteers. As David Robertson points out this equally applies to Cheshire & North Wales, Merseyside, Northumberland, Durham etc.
Last edited by Neil Graham on Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 17319
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Roger de Coverly » Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:16 pm

Neil Graham wrote: I note Mr de Coverly comes from a county that doesn't take part in any ECF competitions. The present rules are perfectly adequate.
Without exceptionally coincidences of player availability and/or bending the rules, there's little chance of national success. Playing for teams with no hope gets depressing after a while. Even Notts adopt this attitude, refusing qualification for the Open national stages.

Neil Graham
Posts: 1138
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:36 pm

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Neil Graham » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:19 am

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Neil Graham wrote: I note Mr de Coverly comes from a county that doesn't take part in any ECF competitions. The present rules are perfectly adequate.
Without exceptionally coincidences of player availability and/or bending the rules, there's little chance of national success. Playing for teams with no hope gets depressing after a while. Even Notts adopt this attitude, refusing qualification for the Open national stages.
Notts reached the Minor Counties final in 2013; all the Midlands Counties have opted to play in the Minor Counties as that reflects their playing strength. In the lower grading limited competitions every county should be in with a chance.

Alan Walton
Posts: 1216
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 pm
Location: Oldham

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by Alan Walton » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:59 am

Neil Graham wrote:Moving on to eligibility matters.

I organise county teams. I ensure that all players in my teams are eligible to represent Nottinghamshire. When our sides sit down to play other counties, I cannot spend time scrutinising their every player and assume my counterpart has followed the rules just as I have done. If people are unhappy I suggest that a part of the match captain's duties is to sign the match sheet prior to the match confirming that his team members are eligible to play under Schedule C of the rules. In the case of the players mentioned in previous posts I have no idea if they were eligible to play - that's a matter for the ECF.

It is to be noted that Greater Manchester were county champions in 1990, 2004 & 2005. Nowadays they can't even raise a team - the only team they ran this year was in the U160 section. I have no idea why they would want to join the NCCU - the NCCU don't have any county chess apart from the odd match between Yorkshire & Lancashire if they bother to turn out. As Manchester have no county teams either it seems a pretty fruitless effort - at least there is some county chess in the MCCU! They are always welcome here unlike elsewhere.

The reason for all this is the usual one - there are sufficient players but no volunteers. As David Robertson points out this equally applies to Cheshire & North Wales, Merseyside, Northumberland, Durham etc.
Neil,

The main point which I hear is the travelling; it got to the stage in the open section where we were playing all games at neutral venues, Stafford or Stoke, with the M6 gamble travelling times were getting unbearable, so having the option of matches in more convenient locations like the current NCCU venues is desirable.

Another factor is the strength, I started to notice the MCCU open teams getting decidedly weaker, getting to the stage none of them enter a the main championship, so pitting ourselves against Lancashire and Yorkshire will inject some great competition up north

John Reyes
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by John Reyes » Tue Jul 04, 2017 4:17 pm

Alan Walton wrote:
Neil Graham wrote:Moving on to eligibility matters.

I organise county teams. I ensure that all players in my teams are eligible to represent Nottinghamshire. When our sides sit down to play other counties, I cannot spend time scrutinising their every player and assume my counterpart has followed the rules just as I have done. If people are unhappy I suggest that a part of the match captain's duties is to sign the match sheet prior to the match confirming that his team members are eligible to play under Schedule C of the rules. In the case of the players mentioned in previous posts I have no idea if they were eligible to play - that's a matter for the ECF.

It is to be noted that Greater Manchester were county champions in 1990, 2004 & 2005. Nowadays they can't even raise a team - the only team they ran this year was in the U160 section. I have no idea why they would want to join the NCCU - the NCCU don't have any county chess apart from the odd match between Yorkshire & Lancashire if they bother to turn out. As Manchester have no county teams either it seems a pretty fruitless effort - at least there is some county chess in the MCCU! They are always welcome here unlike elsewhere.

The reason for all this is the usual one - there are sufficient players but no volunteers. As David Robertson points out this equally applies to Cheshire & North Wales, Merseyside, Northumberland, Durham etc.
Neil,

The main point which I hear is the travelling; it got to the stage in the open section where we were playing all games at neutral venues, Stafford or Stoke, with the M6 gamble travelling times were getting unbearable, so having the option of matches in more convenient locations like the current NCCU venues is desirable.

Another factor is the strength, I started to notice the MCCU open teams getting decidedly weaker, getting to the stage none of them enter a the main championship, so pitting ourselves against Lancashire and Yorkshire will inject some great competition up north

Neil

the rules need to be look at the county levels and maybe we need to tied up the rules!!

and it is Lancashire who is stopping Manchester joining the NCCU, and I can't see a wait pass it unless the ECF said that we need to say that Greater Manchester is a county and they should have a choice to play in the NCCU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_England


I was shocked that some of the Manchester and Liverpool players was playing for Lancashire open team.
Can't wait to hear what the Lancashire AGM said about this?
Any postings on here represent my personal views only

John Reyes
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:51 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: County Championship Finals

Post by John Reyes » Wed Jul 05, 2017 5:27 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Alan Walton wrote: From your post then, I assume you are saying GMan covers all these criteria, and any dual eligibility is sitting in the unknown background and not applicable to the current published rules of the competition
Personally I think most or all eligibility rules should be scrapped and you should be able to play for who you want to. That might be the only way to resolve the forty year old dispute which appears to have started with Lancashire objecting to a new county taking "their" players away.

But now it's been asked, perhaps the ECF could clarify the eligibility conditions for playing for Lancashire and presumably therefore why the Horton brothers satisfied them. The explicit rules about eligibility are muddy on what constitutes a county.

do you think the ECF will say when certain players was ok to play for Lancashire?
Any postings on here represent my personal views only

Post Reply